Seahunter
Set Price Alerts

Combos Browse all Suggest

Legality

Format Legality
1v1 Commander Legal
Archenemy Legal
Block Constructed Legal
Canadian Highlander Legal
Casual Legal
Commander / EDH Legal
Commander: Rule 0 Legal
Custom Legal
Duel Commander Legal
Highlander Legal
Legacy Legal
Leviathan Legal
Limited Legal
Oathbreaker Legal
Planar Constructed Legal
Planechase Legal
Premodern Legal
Quest Magic Legal
Vanguard Legal
Vintage Legal

Seahunter

Creature — Human Mercenary

(3), Tap: Search your library for a Merfolk permanent card and put that card into play. Then shuffle your library.

legendofa on The New Commander Brackets Beta

2 weeks ago

I've been struggling with this for a couple of my decklists recently, and I'm trying to summarize my thoughts here without starting a new thread. So this is semi-stream-of-thought, and I apologize if it gets a little rambly.

There are several criteria being tracked by the current bracket system, including resource generation, speed, reliability, and oppression, and possibly others.

Game changers: A combo like Demonic Consultation/Tainted Pact + Thassa's Oracle gets a key card on the game changers list, because it's fast and reliable, ending a match on turn 3-4. These are speed game changers. Other game changers generate resources just by playing the game, like Rhystic Study or Smothering Tithe. This group often also includes oppression, since a lot of them tax the opponent. Another group is cheap (1-2 mana) tutors, like Vampiric Tutor, Enlightened Tutor, or Survival of the Fittest, that increase a deck's reliability for very little opportunity cost. Most game changers can be sorted into one of these four categories. Ancient Tomb and Gaea's Cradle are speed and resource generation, Drannith Magistrate and Force of Will are oppression, and so on.

Bracket Guidelines: From Gavin Verhey's announcement article, here's what each of the brackets mean and expect. Important to note that the system is still in beta testing, so this is probably going to be different in the future.

  • Bracket 1: Decks with more focus on a gimmick than on winning. "Winning is not the primary goal here, as it's more about showing off something unusual you've made. Villains yelling in the art? Everything has the number four? Oops, all Horses? Those are all fair game!" This bracket doesn't allow extra turns, two-card infinite combos, mass land denial, or game changers, and restricts tutors.

  • Bracket 2: Decks that can win, but are not tightly focused, or slow to develop. "While Bracket 2 decks may not have every perfect card, they have the potential for big, splashy turns, strong engines, and are built in a way that works toward winning the game. While the game is unlikely to end out of nowhere and generally goes nine or more turns, you can expect big swings." This bracket doesn't allow any game changers, mass land denial, two-card infinite combos, or multiple extra turns in a row, and restricts tutors.

  • Bracket 3: Decks that are focused on winning efficiently, but are not optimized. "They are full of carefully selected cards, with work having gone into figuring out the best card for each slot. The games tend to be a little faster as well, ending a turn or two sooner than your Core (Bracket 2) decks." This bracket does not allow mass land denial or multiple extra turns in a row, and restricts game changers and two-card infinite combos, and allows tutors freely.

  • Bracket 4: Decks that are optimized for their strategy. "Bring out your strongest decks and cards... This is high-powered Commander, and games have the potential to end quickly. The focus here is on bringing the best version of the deck you want to play, but not one built around a tournament metagame." This bracket has no restrictions.

  • Bracket 5: Decks that expect to win at the most competitive levels. "There is care paid into following and paying attention to a metagame and tournament structure, and no sacrifices are made in deck building as you try to be the one to win the pod." This brackets has no restrictions.

Deck Analysis 1: The deck I've been struggling most with is Clear Waters. As I listed in another thread, it has an infinite turns combo (Wanderwine Prophets + Deeproot Pilgrimage + Merfolk Sovereign) and mass land denial (Opposition + Seedborn Muse, Quicksilver Fountain), and a selection of tutors to pull these together (Forerunner of the Heralds, Idyllic Tutor, Merrow Harbinger, Seahunter, and Sterling Grove). This should put it squarely into Bracket 4.

My concern is that it's neither high powered nor optimized. On the axes of speed, resource generation, reliability, and oppression, I would score it high on oppression, pretty good on reliability, and low on speed and resources generation. Looking at examples of other Bracket 4 decks around the internet, all four of those criteria need to be high in this bracket. The infinite turns combo is slow and easily removed, and the land denial is optional (Opposition can have other targets) or temporary (Quicksilver Fountain can remove its own effect).

It would be easy to simply add a big pile of game changers to improve all of these facets. Right now, it has one game changer in Grand Arbiter Augustin IV, and that one's not essential to the deck. That's not the direction I want to go with the deck, though--I want to keep it reasonably budget, and even adding the three least expensive of the game changers I'm considering would basically double the deck's cost.

I know that people in brackets under 4 want to be able to play their deck, and the infinite turns and land denial shut that down. These are clearly stated in the announcement article -"A single extra-turn spell can be fun and splashy. However, extra-turn spells take a ton of time away from other players and their ability to play the game and tend to be unfun when repeated."- that's why they're forced into brackets 4 and 5. But if a deck isn't able to compete against high power, optimized Bracket 4 decks, can it be considered Bracket 4?

Deck Analysis 2: Another deck that I've been struggling with is an enchantment deck, Do Not Mistake Peace For Passivity. The point of concern for this deck is land denial. Blood Moon is classic mass land denial, and the deck is designed to play around it with Abundant Growth, Fertile Ground, Prismatic Omen, and similar cards. It also has a combo that doesn't directly deny lands, but punishes their play and use: Manabarbs + Citadel of Pain. Otherwise, the deck fits all the criteria of a Bracket 2 deck--no game changers, no infinite combos, few tutors, and no extra turns.

This deck can be converted into a pure Bracket 2 deck without much effort by replacing Blood Moon and Manabarbs. But as it stands, a single card pushes the deck up two brackets, according to the guidelines. Again, I don't feel the deck is high powered or optimized, and would not be able to compete in a Bracket 4 match. It could probably survive in Bracket 3, since it's highly synergistic, but nothing any higher.

In this case, adding a bunch of game changers and power cards would somewhat dilute how the deck functions. A few, like Smothering Tithe or Trouble in Pairs, could slot in, but most others would be more gratuitous.

Conclusion: To quote the article again, "There's some wiggle room, and while playing against decks that are all inside your bracket is ideal, you can usually wiggle within one bracket away from you safely." "You should play where you think you belong based on the descriptions." All of this can be discussed in a Rule 0 talk. I strongly believe the brackets are intended to help this conversation, not replace it. As an example, for the Clear Waters deck, I would say that the deck is not optimized to Bracket 4, and I think it fits best into Bracket 3, but it's controlling and has a potential three-card infinite turns combo. I'm willing to announce when the combo is assembled and ready to start, to give everyone a turn cycle to react, and reduce the use of Opposition to creatures and artifacts.

I feel like the current setup is a little too restrictive of the kind of combo-control decks I like. I can have fun smashing big creatures into each other and outmaneuvering everyone else, but I will enjoy locking down the board and establishing my inevitability, and I'm having a harder time trying to find ways to do that in lower brackets. Some people have already offered me excellent feedback and suggestions that I'm taking into consideration, but I'd also like to see how people are responding to the bracket system so far.

For comparison, here's a few more of my decklists:

legendofa on Testing brackets with Merfolk combos

3 weeks ago

I just finished detailing this deck.

deck chart

Clear Waters

Commander / EDH legendofa

10 VIEWS

It has an infinite turns combo with redundancies. Wanderwine Prophets + Deeproot Pilgrimage + Merfolk Sovereign

It has land denial. Opposition + Seedborn Muse, Quicksilver Fountain

It has a game changer. Grand Arbiter Augustin IV

It has multiple relevant tutors. Forerunner of the Heralds, Idyllic Tutor, Merrow Harbinger, Seahunter, Sterling Grove

By all measures, this deck falls under Bracket 4. But I think it better fits Bracket 3, because Wanderwine Prophets is the most expensive card. It simply can't compete with decks whose individual cards are worth more than this whole thing, or decks with six game changers and "I win" combos that land on turn 3. It just isn't up to that level. The turns combo in particular is slow and highly telegraphed, since Prophets needs to survive a turn cycle before it can go off.

So where does this fall? Bracket 3? Low-end Bracket 4? The fuzzy gray area in the middle? Would you accept a Bracket 3 match with potential infinite turns and land locks?

Ward_of_Kangee on Mercadian Staques

7 months ago

Squee_Spirit_Guide Thank you! It's definitely crossed my mind (Rootwater Hunter too, tutorable off Seahunter!) but the cards are near useless if Charisma doesn't show, so at least for now I haven't been able to justify giving them multiple slots. Maybe someday!

Tsukimi on Fish, Inc.

2 years ago

Dakomos I am playtesting my merfolk deck this weekend and I will keep this in mind. That was my initial thought with Seahunter, that most of our merfolk are 3 or less anyways but the temptation of using that once a turn with cards like Seedborn Muse is strong. I also expect my deck to slap a big target on my back after I play a few games, I'll report back on Seahunter.

Has Vanquisher's Banner been working well for you? I have tried it in other tribal decks but it always feels just a tad too expensive manawise.

Also, I am debating throwing in a Quicksilver Fountain because it guarantees us the use of islandwalk, fits the theme, and messes with our opponent's mana. Might be too mean though.

Also, how has your deck been with board wipes and mass removal? The temptation to include a Creeping Renaissance is strong.

Dakomos on Fish, Inc.

2 years ago

I did not include Seahunter solely becuase I don't like to use too many tutors. My deck already is very strong and consistent and therefore often the target of my playgroup.

My best bet is to always swim under the radar and win out of nowhere. Seahunter always has a giant target on its back and is therefore not included. Additionally I found his effect to not be that insanely strong since most merfolk dont cost that much mana anyway and I found myself to nearly always tutor Tishana, Voice of Thunder as a result of that. But looking at my past games I think I'd more often than not tutor for the MVP of this deck Merrow Reejerey.

Do you have an idea which card(s) to cut for it?

Tsukimi on Fish, Inc.

2 years ago

Working on a similar build and I love your deck! With access to seedborn muse and other effects I am surprised you didn't include Seahunter. Too expensive mana wise?

blueiris on The sea's rage is a mere glimpse of our power

3 years ago

Following up~

I think I'm going to test with both Arcane Adaptation and Maskwood Nexus , then remove one if needed. I like the idea of seeing one of these every match, so we'll see if it's too much or not.

Re: Sensei's Divining Top , I'll leave it out of this build based on your advice. I love some Top , and have other decks that use it, so thanks for the feedback suggesting that it's not entirely crucial.

Agreed with Seahunter , it's in the deck, and so are both Forerunner of the Heralds & Merrow Harbinger . I guess with the redundancy of this and changeling I was hoping for more consistency, but can certainly trim anything that's excessive.

What do you think about these one drop merfolk? I like Reef Shaman , Tideshaper Mystic , and Tidal Warrior for land control in either direction.

I've got the Dramatic Scepter combo in the deck I run Top in, so those cards won't make the cut in this deck. The goal for me overall is to have decks with varying play styles.

I'd be open to any advice! Here's my 99: Kumena, Just Tap It In

Thanks, again for your amazing list!

Pheardemons on The sea's rage is a mere glimpse of our power

3 years ago

blueiris - Thanks for the comment and compliment. I'm glad I could help you!

I have recently taken out Arcane Adaptation because, before Maskwood Nexus , I was only playing one effect like this and was doing fine. I'm testing Maskwood Nexus over Arcane Adaptation for the effect of making tokens. As of now, I have not missed having both effects, but it has been a recent change so I'm still testing.

The deck can operate just fine without everything being a merfolk. This is an effect to help with tokens from Master of Waves and so Seahunter can tutor out any creature that I need ( Frilled Mystic and Venser, Shaper Savant come to mind here). This kind of effect allows me to use the effects of Lullmage Mentor , draw ability of Kumena , and Merrow Reejerey to a better, more efficient extent. Not required, but helps greatly.

If you don't like Sensei's Divining Top for whatever reason, you don't need to play it. I'm the kind of player who will tell you to play with cards you like than what other people "expect" or "staple" type cards. I like Top because of the utility. This deck's number one goal is to be able to untap on other player's turn. I can draw a card (more likely with Kumena ), activate top to dig one deeper than before, to do it again on everyone's turn to try and ensure I draw what I need. I will agree that taking it out will definitely simplify the deck haha. Because Kumena is a powerful draw engine you don't need it.

I don't have Merrow Harbinger because I am playing Seahunter . He is FAR superior in my opinion. In saying that, a second tutor does become better if you play both Maskwood Nexus and Arcane Adaptation because it could become a Worldly Tutor with a body on the board. I would say playtest with and without it, and see how you like it.

I have gone through multiple iterations of this deck. I have recently left the infinite combo of Isochron Scepter and Dramatic Reversal because I didn't get it often enough to matter. It became a "win more." I will miss putting a Mana Drain on Isochron Scepter turn two haha. I'm trying to go back to one of my earlier iterations with Opposition and I'm REALLY trying to find a way to put Asceticism , Wrap in Vigor , Svyelun of Sea and Sky , and Illusionist's Bracers into the deck. They just seem like slower cards that I don't need, but want. That rant was just to say let me know if you have any other questions or options because I have probably tried a lot of them. If you have a list I'm down to look at it if you tell me what you're trying to do.

Load more